If the pandemic is over when we say it is (nyti.ms/2AMeUWO), we've got a long way to go. 75% of Ontarians are afraid & it seems most are willing to let the gov't do whatever necessary to keep them safe, for however long. It's now unfortunately political to say otherwise.
I said on @am640 today that the onus is on the gov't to prove that the ongoing suspension of civil liberties is demonstrably justified in light of what we now know about the virus (it's mainly a LTC problem). That calculus is different than in mid-March. nationalpost.com/news/four-out-…
But they won't justify it unless the media, courts and citizens hold their feet to the fire. And here in Ontario, with fear driving the agenda, it's clear that won't be happening any time soon.
Fear is a dangerous emotion to play around with. Fear of contagion makes people more irrational and xenophobic: gsb.stanford.edu/insights/how-f…
Our bodies aren't designed for long term panic, and it shuts out our ability to reason and process new information as it becomes available: nationalgeographic.com/history/refere…
It's time for a rational, objective, non-partisan review of the facts surrounding this virus. Here are some stats in the US. We should be looking at this data more critically here in Ontario too:
Things seem to be in complete chaos in this province, as fears of Omicron relieve our decision makers & managerial class of their senses (what’s left of them). Here are 10 policy suggestions for @fordnation to keep the wheels on & bring the chaos to heel before the next election:
i) Provide home test kits to ease minds & recommend that people isolate themselves if positive. Otherwise, stop testing asymptomatic people, and stop recording cases. They are untethered from hospitalizations and deaths (that’s a good thing) and we need to stop focusing on them.
ii) Stop contact tracing. Everyone is going to get this, & for virtually everyone it will be mild. People should stay home with symptoms, but otherwise carry on with their lives. If you isolate everyone exposed, no one will be at work and critical infrastructure will be at risk.
I've been contacted by many specialist physicians who are about to lose hospital privileges because of these mandates. Their reasons for not complying are unique, informed & rational, but virtually no exemptions are being granted. Mandates WON'T make them change their minds. 1/5
These doctors will leave their hospitals, maybe even their careers & very likely the country. There are friendly US states that pay doctors better anyway, & don't require the jab in order to work.
Another brain drain is about to ensue. 2/5
The mandates don't make logical sense anyway, for a vaccine that does not stop transmission, that is likely only effective for about six months & has considerable risks, known and unknown. And all for a virus that is manageable for about 99% of the working age population. 3/5
"The events of the last year have made the culture shift undeniable. Group rights are in. Individual rights are out." theepochtimes.com/covid-response…
"It is remarkable that the notion of voluntary, informed consent—the hallmark of medical treatment in a civilized society—is now seen as an unreasonable and selfish obstacle to unquestionable goals.
"Like virtually all of our Covid responses, mandatory, universal vaccination is unmoored from past practices, plans, evidence, & rationality. It has taken on a moral urgency, fuelled by a collective fear that instinctively steamrolls over individual rights, desires, & interests.
1/ The Ford gov't was supposed to return to the legislature this week if it wanted to continue the 2nd "state of emergency", which the cabinet could only keep in place for 28 days (now finished).
Our elected legislature would have had a chance to debate, consider & vote.
2/ Instead, just like they did in July with the "Reopening Ontario Act" (doublespeak much?), the gov't is managing to avoid the legislature (although it did pass the Act), keep the emergency orders in effect & continue to concentrate power in the cabinet (particularly, the CMOH).
3/ This is bad for democracy, for the constitution & for civil liberties. Other Western democracies are facing similar threats, with little concern for the preservation of important norms that undergird or way of life in a free society. Good article below about the UK experience.
The compelled speech angle wasn't fully explored in Shahdin's op-ed, which I understand was abbreviated to fit space constraints @CanLawMag, but the directive requires ALL lawyers to state their own pronouns, not just extend a courtesy to those who may prefer something different.
Most lawyers are respectful toward individuals who identify themselves differently. But the main point of contention is that this goes beyond courtesy into enforced complicity in controversial gender ideology.
As with most contentious issues, it is important that the conversation be allowed to take place in the public square. Naturally, those demanding everyone else fall in line want the article pulled. Hopefully @CanLawMag holds firm & permits different perspectives to be heard.